2 INTRODUCTION The 2009 Florida Prison Recidivism Study is the first report to be produced annually that examines the issue of recidivism among Florida's released inmate population. The use of recidivism as a performance indicator of the state's rehabilitative efforts can be debated, but the analysis itself is of vital public importance. Basically, what is the likelihood that an inmate who is released today will come back to prison? This question is important for the state in terms of planning and budgeting, but more importantly to the public and elected officials in terms of public safety. Since 88% of inmates in Florida's prisons today will one day be released back into our communities, their success or failure comes at a cost to public order and public safety. The next pertinent question is, What factors influence recidivism rates? Do age, gender and racial groups show differences in recidivism rates? The answers to these questions are also important, as they allow one to identify groups most likely to fail when they are released. This can be used to determine where to devote scarce correctional and community resources. This study finds that results for Florida are generally consistent with existing research of the factors that influence recidivism. The Bureau of Justice Statistics report, "Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 1994 (2002)" shows overall recidivism rates for releases from 15 different states. That report shows a 51.8% recidivism rate (return to prison for any reason within three years) for this group of inmates. Unlike most states, Florida paroles very few inmates and only about a third of released inmates have any community supervision sanction at all. Since those with supervision after release recidivate more often than those without supervision upon release, it is important to keep in mind that Florida's recidivism rate may be lower than another state due to this difference in release mechanisms. May Florida Prison Recidivism Study Page 2 of 18

4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY For this report, recidivism is defined as a return to prison, either because of a new conviction or a violation of post prison supervision. The follow-up periods (typically reported as three years) are calculated from prison release date to the date of readmission to prison. The overall three-year recidivism rate based on all released inmates from 2001 to 2008 is 33.1%. Specifically, the last three years have shown a slight decrease in the threeyear recidivism rate. Inmates released in % recidivism rate Inmates released in % recidivism rate Inmates released in % recidivism rate Note that a one percentage point drop in the recidivism rate results in approximately 400 fewer inmates being admitted over a three-year period at a cost of $20,000 per year per inmate or a cost avoidance of approximately $8,000,000. The factors that influence an inmate's likelihood of recidivism include: prior prison commitments (more priors higher recidivism); whether the inmate has a supervision term after release (supervised higher recidivism); their age at release (younger higher recidivism); their behavior while in prison (more disciplinary reports higher recidivism); their tested education level (higher grade level lower recidivism); and number of theft/fraud offenses in criminal history (more offenses higher recidivism) Inmates who complete education programs while in prison have lower recidivism rates than inmates who do not complete programs. Note that this conclusion does not take into account any other differences in these two groups and should not be given the weight of a rigorous program evaluation. May Florida Prison Recidivism Study Page 4 of 18

5 METHODOLOGY Inmates released from Florida prisons from January 1, 2001 to December 31, 2008 were included in the study with the following exceptions: Inmates who died, were executed, had their sentence vacated, or were released to another state have been omitted from calculation of recidivism rates. Inmates who are missing information on the factors of interest are omitted. These restrictions reduce the number of records analyzed by approximately 29%. Survival analysis techniques are used to compute recidivism rates and to define the statistical models used to determine which factors significantly influence recidivism rates. The basic rates for tables and graphs are computed from Kaplan-Meier estimates of the survival curve using right-censored data. The analyses of factor significance are conducted using Cox models (proportional hazards regression) of the same data. The analysis used a 5% level of significance and, to determine the factors in order of importance, a stepwise selection routine for determining which factors to include. Twenty-one (21) factors considered: Gender is Male Yes/No Number of Prior Prison Commitments Age at release Number of Disciplinary Reports in Current Incarceration Most Recent TABE score (education level in grade equivalents) Time Served in Prison, Current Incarceration in Months Worst Offense is Murder/Manslaughter Yes/No Worst Offense is Sex Offense Yes/No Worst Offense is Robbery Yes/No Worst Offense is Other Violent Offense like Assault or Kidnapping Yes/No Race is Black Yes/No Ethnicity is Hispanic Yes/No Supervision to Follow Prison Yes/No Low Custody (Minimum or Community Custody) Yes/No High Custody (Close Custody) Yes/No Number of Burglary offenses in criminal history Number of Drug offenses in criminal history Number of Theft/Fraud offenses in criminal history Number of Weapons offenses in criminal history Diagnosed Mental Illness Yes/No Substance Abuse Severity Score For the "Worst Offense" factors the hierarchy is as follows: Murder, Sex Offense, Robbery, Other Violent Offense Each inmate can only be designated in at most one of the categories. If he has committed both Sex Offenses and Robbery, he will be considered in the "Worst Offense is Sex Offense" category, not in the "Worst Offense is Robbery" category. May Florida Prison Recidivism Study Page 5 of 18

6 For the criminal history factors, only those offenses for which the inmate received either a Florida prison sentence or Florida community supervision sentence are considered. Arrests in Florida that resulted in other sanctions, such as fines or county jail sentences are not considered. Arrests, supervision, or prison sentences outside of Florida are not considered unless they are part of the inmate's Florida sentence. May Florida Prison Recidivism Study Page 6 of 18

7 RECIDIVISM RATES OVER TIME Three year recidivism rate by year of release 40.0% 38.0% 36.0% 34.0% 32.6% 33.2% 33.9% 33.4% 32.7% Recidivism rate 32.0% 30.0% 28.0% 26.0% 24.0% 22.0% 20.0% Year of Release from Prison The range of recidivism rates when examined one year of releases at a time, range from 32.6% to 33.9% in the five years for which three-year rates can be computed. Recidivism rates are certainly affected by factors outside the influence of the Department of Corrections, such as unemployment, crime rates, and local criminal justice issues such as jail bed availability and judicial behavior. Statewide initiatives such as truth-in-sentencing, increased use of mandatory prison terms and inconsistent funding for inmate rehabilitative programs may also influence recidivism rates. For this reason, recidivism rates cannot be used as the only measure of operational performance for the prison system. It is a measure of a multitude of societal issues working for and against the released inmate, before he ever gets sentenced to prison and after he is released. The slight upward increase in 2002 and 2003 that is followed by decreases in 2004 and 2005 may be due to an overall increase in revocations of supervision that peaked in 2005 and subsequently declined to previous levels. This trend would affect the 2003 release cohort more than the subsequent years of releases. Note that a one percentage point drop in the recidivism rate results in approximately 400 fewer inmates being admitted over a three-year period. Considering that it costs taxpayers almost $20,000 per year for each inmate incarcerated, even a relatively small decrease in recidivism rates that persists over multiple years can result in millions of taxpayer dollars to be used for other priorities. May Florida Prison Recidivism Study Page 7 of 18

8 RECIDIVISM AND GENDER Recidivism, gender 70.0% Female Male All 60.0% 50.0% Recidivism rate 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% Months since release Female inmates recidivate at a much lower rate than male inmates. In fact, it takes six years for a female inmate to recidivate at the same rate as a male inmate does in three years (female recidivism at six years from release is 33.2%; male recidivism rate at three years from release is 34.7%) May Florida Prison Recidivism Study Page 8 of 18

9 RECIDIVISM AND VIOLENT OFFENSES Recidivism, current offense 70.0% Murder/Manslaughter Robbery Other Violent Offense Sex Offense All 60.0% 50.0% Recidivism rate 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% Months since release The graph above shows that among inmates who were in prison for violent offenses, those in for murder or manslaughter have the lowest recidivism rates. Inmates in for robbery offenses have higher than average recidivism rates. May Florida Prison Recidivism Study Page 9 of 18

10 RECIDIVISM AND NON-VIOLENT OFFENSES Recidivism, current offense 70.0% 60.0% Burglary Theft/Fraud Weapons Drugs All 50.0% Recidivism rate 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% Months since release The graph above shows that among inmates who were in prison for non-violent offenses, those in for weapons offenses have the lowest recidivism rates. Burglars released during this period have the highest recidivism rates. Drug offenders recidivate at a rate similar to the overall recidivism rate for all inmates. May Florida Prison Recidivism Study Page 10 of 18

11 RECIDIVISM AND AGE Recidivism, age 70.0% Under to to to % 50.0% Recidivism rate 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% Months since release The older an inmate is at time of release, the less likely he is to return to prison. Note that while this relationship is apparent several months after release from prison, there is quite a bit of overlap in the first three years after release. The groups of inmates 49 and younger recidivate at similar rates until two to three years after release, at which point the curves shown above begin to separate. May Florida Prison Recidivism Study Page 11 of 18

13 NUMERIC FACTORS CRIMINAL HISTORY SUBSTANCE ABUSE NEED TIME SERVED INSTITUTIONAL BEHAVIOR EDUCATION LEVEL VALUE MEDIAN MEAN Hazard Ratio Number of Prior Prison Commitments ** Number of Burglary Offenses ** Number of Theft Offenses ** Number of Drug Offenses ** Number of Weapons 0.965** Offenses Score from substance abuse assessment ** Months served during current incarceration ** Number of Disciplinary Reports during current incarceration ** Most recent TABE score (grade equivalents) ** AGE Age at release ** **: p-value 0.01; *: 0.01 < p-value 0.05; NS: Not Significant at α = 0.05 Note that hazard ratios in the above tables are interpreted as the multiple of the likelihood of failure. For example, male inmates have a hazard ratio of Since it is greater than one, it means that a male inmate is ( =0.506) 50.6% more likely to fail than a female inmate with all other factors held constant (they are identical on all factors in the model except for gender). On the other hand, if the hazard ratio is less than one, the interpretation is a percent reduction in likelihood to fail. For example, an Hispanic inmate is ( =.248) 24.8% less likely to recidivate than a non-hispanic inmate with all other factors held constant. May Florida Prison Recidivism Study Page 13 of 18

14 Those measures that are expressed as numeric counts instead of dichotomous (Yes/No), the hazard ratios show the increase or decrease PER UNIT INCREASE in the factor. For example, for each additional disciplinary report that an inmate incurs while incarcerated, his likelihood of recidivating increases by ( =.010) 1.0%. For each additional grade level tested, his likelihood of recidivating decreases by ( =0.037) 3.7%. Factors Not Included in the Model FACTOR VALUE N % RECIDIVISM RATE RELEASE Expiration of TYPE Sentence (No Supervision to Follow) 117,868 66% 26.3% Conditional Release (mandatory supervision for serious offenders as specified in F.S ) 22,468 13% 57.3% Expiration of Sentence to Probation or Community Control (Split Sentence) 30,594 17% 39.3% RELEASE FACILITY Major Correctional Institution 120,233 67% 36.2% Private Correctional Institution 11,780 7% 29.9% Work/Forestry Camp 16,622 9% 34.7% Work Release Center 25,565 14% 23.0% Contracted Transition and Work Release Center 3,242 2% 17.9% PROGRAM COMPLETERS GED 9,227 5% 29.0% Vocational Certificate 13,141 7% 28.1% Note that the results presented in the table above do not constitute a rigorous evaluation of any program. For example, it is not valid to claim that if all inmates went to Work Release Centers, one would realize a lower overall recidivism rate. Inmates who succeed May Florida Prison Recidivism Study Page 14 of 18

15 at work release do not have the same characteristics as many other inmates, so the work release impact would likely be different if expanded to include a broader group of inmates. Likewise, the program completion information presented in the table does not constitute a rigorous evaluation of those programs. The results are similar to those reported in the Washington State Institute for Public Policy study of evidence-based practices in corrections, but are based solely on Florida Department of Corrections data. May Florida Prison Recidivism Study Page 15 of 18

U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report April 2014 ncj 244205 Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 30 States in 2005: Patterns from 2005 to 2010

February 2007 Report No. 07-14 Corrections Rehabilitative Programs Effective, But Serve Only a Portion of the Eligible Population at a glance The department s rehabilitative programs serve only a small

Mercyhurst College Civic Institute An Overview of the Criminal Justice System January 2005 Erika Brown, Research Analyst Art Amann, Director Table of Contents Table of Contents...1 Introduction...2 Methodology...2

U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report March 1997, NCJ-160092 Lifetime Likelihood of Going to State or Federal Prison By Thomas P. Bonczar and

U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report Truth in Sentencing January 99, NCJ 170032 in State Prisons By Paula M. Ditton Doris James Wilson BJS Statisticians

Statistics on Women in the Justice System January, 2014 All material is available though the web site of the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS): http://www.bjs.gov/ unless otherwise cited. Note that correctional

A Decade of Truth-In- Sentencing in Virginia A decade ago, Virginia abolished parole and adopted truth-in-sentencing for convicted felons. Over 200,000 criminals have been punished under noparole laws.

Performance Metrics for Community Corrections February 2015 State of California Board of State and Community Corrections 600 Bercut Drive Sacramento CA 95811 www.bscc.ca.gov Performance Metrics in Community

March 2010 Report No. 10-27 Intermediate Sanctions for Non-Violent Offenders Could Produce Savings at a glance Some states have implemented policies to reduce criminal justice costs by reserving prison

CENTER ON JUVENILE AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE JUNE 2007 www.cjcj.org Crime Rates and Youth Incarceration in Texas and California Compared: Public Safety or Public Waste? By Mike Males PhD, Christina Stahlkopf

Issue Brief Project Public Safety NamePerformance Project The Impact of Arizona s Probation Reforms An analysis of trends in Arizona s prison system in 2008 estimated that the inmate population would increase

CRIMINAL JUSTICE TRENDS Presented at the Criminal Justice Estimating Conference Held July 28, 2015 (Web Site: http://edr.state.fl.us) Table of Contents Criminal Justice Trends i Accuracy of the February

Methodology for ACLU-WA Marijuana Law Enforcement Costs Data Visualization 1 I. Criminal Justice Data Sources and Formatting for Visualization The criminal justice data used in this visualization are all

A Preliminary Assessment of Risk and Recidivism of Illinois Prison Releasees David E. Olson & Gipsy Escobar Department of Criminal Justice Loyola University Chicago Presented at the Justice Research and

Fighting the Addiction: The Effectiveness of the La Crosse County Drug Court Program Erin R. Petrus Faculty Sponsor: William G. Zollweg, Department of Sociology/Archeology ABSTRACT The purpose of the research

CRIMINAL JUSTICE TRENDS Presented at the Criminal Justice Estimating Conference Held February 27, 2015 (Web Site: http://edr.state.fl.us) Table of Contents Criminal Justice Trends i Accuracy of the November

Removal of Youth in the Adult Criminal Justice System: A State Trends Update Rebecca Gasca on behalf of Campaign for Youth Justice Juvenile Court founded in 1899 to create a separate justice system for

It s all apples and oranges. January 31, 2012 Nathan Brady OLRGC What is recidivism and what is the impact on the state? How does Utah compare nationally? What is Utah doing to address inmate recidivism

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) and Justice-Involved Populations 1. Can Medicaid pay for any health care services provided within jails or prisons? No. Under the ACA (and prior to the ACA), no health care

JFA Institute Conducting Justice and Corrections Research for Effective Policy Making Evaluation of the San Diego County Community Corrections Programs Prepared by James Austin, Ph.D. Roger Ocker Robert

BRIEF I Setting the Stage: Juvenile Justice History, Statistics, and Practices in the United States and North Carolina Ann Brewster Most states juvenile justice systems have two main goals: increased public

Knowledge Brief Are Minority Youths Treated Differently in Juvenile Probation? While many studies have examined disproportionate minority contact at the front end of the juvenile justice system, few have

September 2012 States Report Reductions in Recidivism In many jurisdictions, state and local government officials have intensified their efforts to reduce recidivism. As policymakers are under tremendous

Juvenile Detention Updated: Nearly 55,000 young persons were detained in residential placements in 2013; however, the rate of juvenile detention has been declining since 1999. Still, males and racial/ethnic

Juvenile Justice in Wisconsin by Christina Carmichael Fiscal Analyst Wisconsin Chapter 938 of the Wisconsin statutes is entitled the Juvenile Justice Code. Statute 938.1 of the chapter states that it is

Kids Count 2013-2014 Juvenile Justice Definition State and federal data in this section describe crime among those 10 to 17 in. Currently there are about 82,000 ns in that age group. State data are from

Historical Data Historical Data 33 Introduction to Historical Data The arrival of the new millennium provides an opportunity to reflect on the past and consider the challenges of the future. The 2 th century

County Intermediate Punishment Plan 2014-2015 1. Assessment of available countywide correctional services and future needs The Allegheny County Jail (ACJ) is a detention and incarceration facility based

Reforming Mississippi s Prison System Prepared by the JFA Institute with assistance from the Mississippi Department of Corrections for the Public Safety Performance Project, the Pew Center on the States

Reentry in the State of Connecticut: Partners in Progress February 24-26, 2009 Rachelle Giguere and Becki Ney What is Domestic Violence? The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) defines intimate partner violence

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT: PERSPECTIVES FROM THE STATE WHAT IS PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT? PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT Revises the definition of a felony

Providing Successful, Evidence-Based Substance Abuse and Mental Health Treatment to Men, Women and Adolescents in Polk, Highlands and Hardee Counties for over 39 years. 1 Services Provided for Polk County

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT: PERSPECTIVES FROM THE STATE Erin Sasse, Chief Office of External Affairs erin.sasse@cdcr.ca.gov (916) 445-4950 WHAT IS

ANOTHER LOOK AT MENTAL ILLNESS AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE INVOLVEMENT IN TEXAS: CORRELATES AND COSTS Decision Support Unit Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services Another Look at Mental Illness and Criminal

RE-INCARCERATION OF PRISONERS IN ARIZONA: A FOCUS ON DRUG OFFENDERS The re-incarceration of prisoners in Arizona: a Focus on Drug Offenders Submitted to Arizona Criminal Justice Commission By: Dr. Nancy

TEXAS BOARD OF PARDONS AND PAROLES P.O. Box 13401, Capitol Station Austin, TX 78711 http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/bpp/ WHAT IS PAROLE? Discretionary release of offenders from prison by a Board of Pardons

WHAT IS THE ILLINOIS CENTER OF EXCELLENCE AND HOW DID IT START? MISSION STATEMENT The mission of the Illinois Center of Excellence for Behavioral Health and Justice is to equip communities to appropriately

Offenders on Indeterminate Sentences Introduction Prisoners serving sentences of Life Imprisonment and Preventive Detention form a distinct sub-set of the prisoner population. The following pages provide

Using Data to Inform Evidence-Based Decision Making January 8, 2013 1 New York State Criminal Justice System 500 local police agencies arrest 600,000 annually. 62 locally elected county district attorneys

Overview of Federal Criminal Cases Fiscal Year 2012 Glenn R. Schmitt Jennifer Dukes Office of Research and Data The United States Sentencing Commission 1 received information on 84,360 federal criminal

Testimony of The Legal Aid Society at a public hearing on The Rockefeller Drug Laws 35 Years Later Presented to: Assembly Standing Committee on Codes Assembly Standing Committee on the Judiciary Assembly

Fresno County Public Safety Realignment: One Year of Data Interim Report Prepared by Owen Research & Evaluation September 23, 203 ORE Owen Research & Evaluation Introduction and Overview This report presents

Incarcerated and Over the past quarter century, there has been a profound change in the involvement of women within the criminal justice system. This is the result of more expansive law enforcement efforts,

The institutional population of DRC varies due to a number of factors, some outside the control of policy-makers, such as crime rates. Others, such as the use of non-residential sanctions like probation,

Display 27: Major Criminal Justice Initiatives in Virginia (1988 1998) During the last decade, Virginia lawmakers have enacted various laws to respond to crime in Virginia. This section summarizes some

Trends Related to the Certification of Juveniles as Adults Prepared for the Texas House of Representatives Corrections Committee 82 nd Legislative Session Interim March 6, 2012 Overview Certification is

Mandatory Supervision: The Benefits of Evidence Based Supervision under Public Safety Realignment State prison and probation are two ends of the response continuum traditionally available to judges who

U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report March 1998, NCJ 166611 Substance Abuse and Treatment of Adults on Probation, 1995 By Christopher J. Mumola